IR 05000364/2010501

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
IR 05000364-10-501, on 12/06/10 - 12/17/10, Joseph M. Farley, Emergency Preparedness Inspection
ML110210378
Person / Time
Site: Farley  Southern Nuclear icon.png
Issue date: 01/14/2011
From: Brian Bonser
NRC/RGN-II/DRS/PSB1
To: Jerrica Johnson
Southern Nuclear Operating Co
References
IR-10-501
Download: ML110210378 (10)


Text

nuary 14, 2011

SUBJECT:

JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT - NRC EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS INSPECTION REPORT 05000348/2010501 and 05000364/2010501

Dear Mr. Johnson:

On December 17, 2010, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. The enclosed inspection report documents the inspection results which were discussed on December 17, 2010, with you and other members of your staff.

The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commissions rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license.

The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel. Based on the results of this inspection, no findings were identified.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response, if any, will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Sincerely,

/RA/

Brian Bonser, Chief Plant Support Branch 1 Division of Reactor Safety Docket No.: 50-348, 50-364 License No.: NPF-2, NPF-8

Enclosure:

Inspection Report 05000348/2010501 and 05000364/2010501 w/Attachment: Supplemental Information

REGION II==

Docket Nos.: 50-348, 50-364 License Nos.: NPF-2, NPF-8 Report No.: 05000348/2010501 and 05000364/2010501 Licensee: Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

Facility: Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 Location: Columbia, AL Dates: December 6, 2010 through December 17, 2010 Inspectors: J. Beavers, Emergency Preparedness Inspector R. Baldwin, Senior Operations Engineer M. Speck, Resident Inspector J. Sowa, Resident Inspector Approved by: B. Bonser, Chief Plant Support Branch 1 Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

IR 05000348/2010-501 and 05000364/2010-501; 12/06/2010 - 12/17/2010; Joseph M. Farley

Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2; Baseline Inspection.

The report covered an announced inspection by a regional emergency preparedness inspector, two (2) resident inspectors and a senior operations engineer.

NRC-Identified and Self-Revealing Findings

No findings were identified.

Licensee-Identified Violations

None

REPORT DETAILS

REACTOR SAFETY

Cornerstone: Emergency Preparedness (EP)

1EP1 Exercise Evaluation

a. Inspection Scope

Prior to the inspection activity, the inspectors conducted an in-office review of the exercise objectives and scenario submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to determine if the exercise would test major elements of the emergency plan as required by 10 CFR 50.47(b)(14).

The onsite inspection consisted of the following review and assessment:

  • The adequacy of the licensees performance in the biennial exercise conducted on December 8, 2010, was reviewed and assessed regarding the implementation of the Risk Significant Planning Standards (RSPS) in 10 CFR 50.47 (b)(4), (5), (9), and (10)which address emergency classification, offsite notification, radiological assessment, and protective action recommendations, respectively.
  • The overall adequacy of the licensees emergency response facilities with regard to NUREG-0696, Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities and Emergency Plan commitments. The facilities assessed were the Control Room Simulator, Technical Support Center (TSC), Operations Support Center (OSC) and Emergency Operations Facility (EOF).
  • Other performance areas such as: the emergency response organizations (ERO)recognition of abnormal plant conditions; command and control, intra- and inter-facility communications; prioritization of mitigation activities; utilization of repair and field monitoring teams; interface with offsite agencies; and the overall implementation of the emergency plan and its implementing procedures.
  • The post-exercise critique process and the presentation to the licensee's senior management conducted on December 16, 2010, to evaluate the licensees self-assessment of its Emergency Response Organization (ERO) performance during the exercise and to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, Subsection IV.F.2.g.

The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment. This inspection activity satisfied one inspection sample for the exercise evaluation on a biennial basis.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

1EP4 Emergency Action Level and Emergency Plan Changes

a. Inspection Scope

Since the last NRC inspection of this program area, revisions 50 and 51 of the Emergency Plan were implemented based on the licensees determination, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(q), that the changes resulted in no decrease in the effectiveness of the Plan, and that the revised Plan continued to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.47(b) and Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50. The inspectors conducted a sampling review of the implementing procedure changes made between September 1, 2009, and November 30, 2010, to evaluate for potential decreases in effectiveness of the Plan. However, this review was not documented in a Safety Evaluation Report and does not constitute formal NRC approval of the changes. Therefore, these changes remain subject to future NRC inspection in their entirety.

The inspection was conducted in accordance with NRC Inspection Procedure 71114, 04, Emergency Action Level and Emergency Plan Changes. The applicable planning standard (PS), 10 CFR 50.47(b)(4) and its related 10 CFR 50, Appendix E requirements were used as reference criteria.

The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment. This inspection activity satisfied one inspection sample for the emergency action level and emergency plan changes on an annual basis.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

OTHER ACTIVITIES

4OA1 Performance Indicator Verification

a. Inspection Scope

The inspectors sampled licensee submittals relative to the Performance Indicators (PIs)listed below for the period July 1, 2009, through September 30, 2010. To verify the accuracy of the PI data reported during that period, PI definitions and guidance contained in NEI 99-02, Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline, Revision 6, was used to confirm the reporting basis for each data element.

Emergency Preparedness Cornerstone

  • Emergency Response Organization Drill/Exercise Performance (DEP)
  • Emergency Response Organization Readiness (ERO)
  • Alert and Notification System Reliability (ANS)

For the specified review period, the inspectors examined data reported to the NRC, procedural guidance for reporting PI information, and records used by the licensee to identify potential PI occurrences. The inspectors verified the accuracy of the DEP through review of a sample of drill and event records. The inspectors reviewed selected training records to verify the accuracy of the ERO PI for personnel assigned to key positions in the ERO. The inspectors verified the accuracy of the PI for ANS reliability through review of a sample of the licensees records of periodic system tests. Licensee procedures, records, and other documents reviewed within this inspection area are listed in the Attachment.

The inspectors reviewed various documents which are listed in the Attachment. This inspection activity satisfied one inspection sample for each of the three

(3) Emergency Preparedness PIs, i.e., DEP, ERO, and ANS on an annual basis.

b. Findings

No findings were identified.

4OA6 Meetings, Including Exit

On December 17, 2010, the lead inspector presented the inspection results to Mr. R.

Johnson and other members of licensee management. The inspector confirmed that proprietary information was not provided or examined during the inspection.

ATTACHMENT:

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

KEY POINTS OF CONTACT

Licensee personnel

D. Christiansen, Training Manager
J. Hutto, Operations Manager
J. Horn, Site Support Manager
J.R. Johnson, Site Vice President
S. Odom, Emergency Preparedness Supervisor
W. Oldfield, Principal Licensing Engineer
L. Smith, Maintenance Manager
C. Thornell, Engineering Director

LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED